supply for operating the Mohave plant after 2005. If reasonable assurance of an adequate coal supply isnot obtained, it will become necessary to shut down the Mohave plant after December 31, 2005.Discontinued OperationsInformation about SCE’s discontinued operations appears in Note 12 of Notes to Financial Statementsand is incorporated herein by this reference.SeasonalityDue to warmer weather during the summer months, electric utility revenue during the third quarter ofeach year is generally significant higher than other quarters.Environmental MattersSCE is subject to environmental regulation by federal, state and local authorities in the jurisdictions inwhich it operates in the United States. This regulation, including the areas of air and water pollution,waste management, hazardous chemical use, noise abatement, land use, aesthetics, and nuclear control,continues to result in the imposition of numerous restrictions on SCE’s operation of existing facilities, onthe timing, cost, location, design, construction, and operation by SCE of new facilities, and on the cost ofmitigating the effect of past operations on the environment.SCE believes that it is in substantial compliance with environmental regulatory requirements and thatmaintaining compliance with current requirements will not materially affect its financial position orresults of operations. However, possible future developments, such as the promulgation of more stringentenvironmental laws and regulations, future proceedings that may be initiated by environmentalauthorities, and settlements agreed to by other companies could affect the costs and the manner in whichSCE conducts its business and could cause it to make substantial additional capital or operationalexpenditures. There is no assurance that SCE would be able to recover these increased costs from itscustomers or that SCE’s financial position and results of operations would not be materially adverselyaffected. SCE is unable to predict the extent to which additional regulations may affect its operations andcapital expenditure requirements.Typically, environmental laws and regulations require a lengthy and complex process for obtaininglicenses, permits and approvals prior to construction, operation or modification of a project. Meeting allthe necessary requirements can delay or sometimes prevent the completion of a proposed project as wellas require extensive modifications to existing projects, which may involve significant capital oroperational expenditures. Furthermore, if SCE fails to comply with applicable environmental laws, itmay be subject to injunctive relief, penalties and fines imposed by regulatory authorities.Air QualitySCE’s facilities, including in particular the Mohave plant located in Laughlin, Nevada, and theFour Corners plant located in the Four Corners area of New Mexico, are subject to various air qualityregulations, including the Federal Clean Air Act and similar state and local statutes.Mohave Consent Decree. In 1998, several environmental groups filed suit against the co-owners of theMohave plant regarding alleged violations of emissions limits. In order to resolve the lawsuit andaccelerate resolution of key environmental issues regarding the plant, the parties entered into a consentdecree, which was approved by the Nevada federal district court in December 1999. The decree alsoaddressed concerns raised by the US EPA programs regarding regional haze and visibility. As to regional7
haze, the US EPA issued final rulemaking on July 1, 1999, that did not impose any additional emissionscontrol requirements on the Mohave plant beyond meeting the provisions of the consent decree. As tovisibility, the US EPA issued its final rule regarding visibility impairment at the Grand Canyon onFebruary 8, 2002. This final rule incorporated the terms of the consent decree into the Visibility FederalImplementation Plan for the State of Nevada, making the terms of the consent decree federallyenforceable.SCE’s share of the costs of complying with the consent decree and taking other actions to continueoperation of the Mohave plant beyond 2005 is estimated to be approximately $605 million overapproximately the next four years. On December 3, 2004, the CPUC approved a decision authorizingcertain expenditures related to securing agreements with the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe regardingan alternate water supply for use in a slurry pipeline for transporting coal fuel from the Black Mesa Mineto the Mohave plant, among other limited expenditures. The CPUC left for a later decision (if agreementcan be reached between the Mohave co-owners and the Tribes on post 2005 water and coal supply needs),the approval of capital funds for retrofit of air pollution controls and related equipment needed forcompliance with the consent decree, and for continued operation of Mohave past 2005. It is not currentlyknown whether such an agreement on water and coal supplies for Mohave will be reached with theTribes.Additional information about these issues appears in the MD&A under the headings “OtherDevelopments—Environmental Matters,” and “Regulatory Matters—Generation and PowerProcurement—Mohave Generating Station and Related Proceedings,” and is incorporated herein by thisreference.Mercury. In December 2000, the US EPA announced its intent to regulate mercury emissions and otherhazardous air pollutants from coal-fired electric power plants under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, andindicated that it would propose a rule to regulate these emissions. On January 30, 2004, the US EPApublished proposed rules for regulating mercury emissions from coal fired power plants. The US EPAproposed two rule options for public comment: (1) regulate mercury as a hazardous air pollutant underSection 112(d) of the Clean Air Act; or (2) rescind the US EPA’s December 2000 finding regarding aneed to control coal power plant mercury emissions as a hazardous air pollutant, and instead, promulgatea new “cap and trade” emissions regulatory program to reduce mercury emissions in two phases by years20<strong>10</strong> and 2018. On March 16, 2004, the US EPA published a Supplemental Notice of ProposedRulemaking that provides more details on its emissions cap and trade proposal for mercury, and onNovember 30, 2004, the US EPA issued a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) requesting comments onadditional modeling and other data the US EPA was considering in development of its final rule. TheNODA public comment period closed on January 2, 2005. At this time, the US EPA anticipatesfinalizing the regulations on March 15, 2005, with controls required to be in place on existing units byMarch 15, 2008 (if the technology-based standard is chosen) and 20<strong>10</strong> (when Phase I of the cap and tradeapproach would be implemented if this approach is chosen).For SCE, these regulations will primarily impact its operation of the Mohave Generating Station.Additional information regarding the future operation or shutdown of the Mohave Generating Stationappears in the MD&A under the heading “Regulatory Matters—Generation and Power Procurement—Mohave Generating Station and Related Proceedings,” and is incorporated herein by this reference. Atthis point, based on the January 30, 2004, notice proposing technology based standards, SCE believes thatits Mohave Generating Station would likely meet those proposed standards (if the other issues related toMohave are resolved and the station is in operation). Also, based on the preliminary informationprovided in the US EPA’s January 30, 2004, and March 16, 2004, notices regarding a proposed mercurycap and trade program, SCE believes that Mohave would likely have adequate allocations of mercury8